My point is, permanent annexation doesn't always make sense and the game doesn't provide enough context to justify it. Or Sparta getting conquered for less than 2-3 years, but unable to be released and restored, and so on. Then there is Judea as an example - gets annexed by many regional powers but its population remains mostly unchanged, so it should restore the old state even if it is under new government/dynasty. They kept reemerging from the ashes of every Indian empire's collapse, until very close to the CK2 start date. change of generation).Īnd there are certain nations that should always exist, like the Mahajanpad kingdoms of India that reemerged following the end of Shunga Empire (the successor of Mauryan Empire), and existed until Kushan Empire annexed most of them. But that kind of change should only happen when the cultural/religious demographic of the area has shifted away from the original, and at least a few decades have passed (i.e. What you say is true, and I partially agree. If you however forcefully vassalize rome after diminishing it's size, then you have willfully kept the existing government intact and merely shackled it into your existing bureaucracy. It wouldn't be the same republic, for you must understand that in this time period, the ability to freely wage war is what defines the sovereignty of a country, lacking that you're just a province with internal autonomy. Once you've fully annexed rome, you have dismantled the government and either killed, enslaved, banished, or incorporated what's left of the roman political dynasties into your own state. ![]() It also makes sense that you can vassalize rome but not release it as a client state. It makes sense that a free and independent country might reform the old republic, because people are always trying to reform old empires. Once that happens,The roman republic is dead, and whatever client state you create will not be the same. If you conquered all roman land, you shouldn't be able to release Rome as a vassal. Now for the hypothetical, if they had decided to make a client state instead of annexing carthage as a province, after destroying their government, what would be left would not be carthage, but roman carthage, and it would not be the same. Many carthaginians died in the 3 year siege, and the government was destroyed. Now, rome had to invade them to integrate them, so they "annexed" them like in game after a war. Unlike any subject state they had no guarantee that rome will protect them, like when the numidians raided in 151 BC. Like client states they can't cancel the relationship without a war. Like tributaries, there was never a demand that carthage help in rome's wars, they have limited diplomacy and they pay money to their overlord, but cannot be integrated. In game terms they were somewhere between a tributary and a client state. After the second punic war, Carthage had no land outside Africa (What would become the roman province of the same name), They were forced to pay an indemnity to Rome, they also could not got to war without approval from the Roman senate and all border disputes were to be settled by the roman senate. ![]() Click to expand.I actually disagree with this.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |